|
Philosophy at a very early stage investigated the number and
character of the Existents. Various theories resulted: some
declared for one Existent, others for a finite number, others
again for an infinite number, while as regards the nature of the
Existents- one, numerically finite, or numerically infinite-
there was a similar disagreement. These theories, in so far as
they have been adequately examined by later workers, may be
passed over here; our attention must be directed upon the results
of those whose examination has led them to posit on their awn
account certain well-defined genera.
These thinkers rejected pure unity on the ground of the plurality
observed even in the Intellectual world; they rejected an
infinite number as not reconcilable with the facts and as defying
knowledge: considering the foundations of being to be "genera"
rather than elements strictly so called, they concluded for a
finite number. Of these "genera" some found ten, others less,
others no doubt more.
But here again there is a divergence of views. To some the genera
are first-principles; to others they indicate only a generic
classification of the Existents themselves.
Let us begin with the well-known tenfold division of the
Existents, and consider whether we are to understand ten genera
ranged under the common name of Being, or ten categories. That
the term Being has not the same sense in all ten is rightly
maintained.
But a graver problem confronts us at the outset: Are the ten
found alike in the Intellectual and in the Sensible realms? Or
are all found in the Sensible and some only in the Intellectual?
All in the Intellectual and some in the Sensible is manifestly
impossible.
At this point it would be natural to investigate which of the ten
belong to both spheres, and whether the Existents of the
Intellectual are to be ranged under one and the same genus with
the Existents in the Sensible, or whether the term "Existence"
[or Substance] is equivocal as applied to both realms. If the
equivocation exists, the number of genera will be increased: if
there is no equivocation, it is strange to find the one same
"Existence" applying to the primary and to the derivative
Existents when there is no common genus embracing both primal and
secondary.
These thinkers are however not considering the Intellectual realm
in their division, which was not intended to cover all the
Existents; the Supreme they overlooked.
|
|